Skip to the main content

Long-term health and immunity

Vitamin Aand All-cause mortality

Four sources here, and they say different things: one measured lower all-cause mortality, two found no clear difference and one reported mixed results.

How sure anyone can be

High certainty, level 4 of 4

Further research is very unlikely to change this.

The most certain of the four findings here; each record carries its own.

The numbers reported

One source’s range, drawn against its own line of no difference and scaled to its own numbers.

0.830.88 risk ratio0.93

This range stays on one side of the no-difference line.

Bar the confidence interval — the range the true effect is likely to sit inNotch the number the source reportedLine where there would be no difference at all

Four sources, newest first

We do not pick between these or average them into one number.

What we read is the published abstract, not the full paper, so a blank below may still be printed in the paper itself. A fixed rule worked this out from the source’s own fields. Nobody checked this rating by hand.

  • Systematic review, 2022 · 19 studies pooled · 1,202,382 participants

    High certainty, level 4 of 4

    Vitamin A supplementation for preventing morbidity and mortality in children from six months to five years of age.

    Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022;3(3):CD008524. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008524.pub4. PMID:35294044.

    This source later carried a notice: Update of Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Mar 11;3:CD008524. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008524.pub3. The number below is exactly as the source gave it.

    Number reported
    0.88 risk ratio
    Which way it went
    Lower
    Likely range
    0.83 to 0.93
    Source’s own words
    risk ratio for all-cause mortality vs control at longest follow-up
    Who was studied
    Child 6 to 59 months
    Compared with
    control (placebo or no supplementation)
    Amount taken
    Not in the abstract
    For how long
    Not in the abstract
    Disagreement between studies
    Not in the abstract
    Kind of record
    Journal article
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, and nothing brought it down
    1. Starts at High
    2. Ends at HighNothing brought this one down a step.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision
    Inconsistency
    No high disagreement reported between the 19 studies it pooled

    AI-reviewed & signed — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and checked that the quote, the numbers, the units and the direction match it. No person read it. The owner authorised the agent to sign the batch with the owner's key, and every build rechecks that signature against these exact bytes.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

  • Systematic review, 2019 · 11 studies pooled

    Very low certainty, level 1 of 4

    Early neonatal vitamin A supplementation and infant mortality: an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

    Arch Dis Child. 2019;104(3):217-226. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2018-315242. PMID:30425075.

    Number reported
    0.97 risk ratio
    Which way it went
    Mixed results
    Likely range
    0.89 to 1.06
    Source’s own words
    risk ratio for mortality through 6 months of age vs placebo
    Who was studied
    Neonate
    Compared with
    placebo
    Amount taken
    Not in the abstract
    For how long
    Not in the abstract
    Disagreement between studies
    Not in the abstract
    Kind of record
    Journal article
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 3 steps down: risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency
    1. Starts at High
    2. Risk of bias brought it down to Moderatethe abstract reports no risk-of-bias or quality appraisal, so study limitations cannot be ruled outNot in the abstract
    3. Imprecision brought it down to Lowthe confidence interval includes no effectReported in the abstract
    4. Inconsistency brought it down to Very lowpooled studies disagree on the direction of effectReported in the abstract
    5. Ends at Very low3 steps down.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    indirectness

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    AI-reviewed & signed — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and checked that the quote, the numbers, the units and the direction match it. No person read it. The owner authorised the agent to sign the batch with the owner's key, and every build rechecks that signature against these exact bytes.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

  • Systematic review, 2016 · 7 studies pooled · 21,339 participants

    Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4

    Vitamin A supplementation for the prevention of morbidity and mortality in infants one to six months of age.

    Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;9(9):CD007480. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007480.pub3. PMID:27681486.

    Number reported
    1.05 risk ratio
    Which way it went
    No clear difference
    Likely range
    0.89 to 1.25
    Source’s own words
    risk ratio for all-cause mortality vs control
    Who was studied
    Infant 1 to 6 months
    Compared with
    placebo or no intervention
    Amount taken
    Not in the abstract
    For how long
    Not in the abstract
    Disagreement between studies
    I2 = 0%
    Kind of record
    Journal article
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, one step down: imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Imprecision brought it down to Moderatethe confidence interval includes no effectReported in the abstract
    3. Ends at ModerateOne step down.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    risk of bias and indirectness
    Inconsistency
    No high disagreement reported between the 7 studies it pooled

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    AI-reviewed & signed — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and checked that the quote, the numbers, the units and the direction match it. No person read it. The owner authorised the agent to sign the batch with the owner's key, and every build rechecks that signature against these exact bytes.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

  • Systematic review, 2013

    Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4

    Meta-regression analyses, meta-analyses, and trial sequential analyses of the effects of supplementation with beta-carotene, vitamin A, and vitamin E singly or in different combinations on all-cause mortality: do we have evidence for lack of harm?

    PLoS One. 2013;8(9):e74558. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0074558. PMID:24040282.

    Number reported
    1.08 risk ratio
    Which way it went
    No clear difference
    Likely range
    0.98 to 1.19
    Source’s own words
    risk ratio for all-cause mortality, vitamin A above the RDA vs control
    Who was studied
    Adult
    Compared with
    placebo or no intervention
    Amount taken
    800 ug/d (doses above the RDA) (upper bound: Not in the abstract)
    For how long
    Not in the abstract
    Disagreement between studies
    I(2) = 53%
    Kind of record
    Journal article
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, one step down: imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Imprecision brought it down to Moderatethe confidence interval includes no effectReported in the abstract
    3. Ends at ModerateOne step down.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    risk of bias and indirectness
    Inconsistency
    No disagreement reported, and no count of studies behind it

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    AI-reviewed & signed — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and checked that the quote, the numbers, the units and the direction match it. No person read it. The owner authorised the agent to sign the batch with the owner's key, and every build rechecks that signature against these exact bytes.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

What is still missing from these readings

  • Two do not say how many people took part.
  • Amount taken — Three of Four readings: Not in the abstract.
  • For how long — Not in the abstract.

Something nobody wrote down is never a zero and never a guess.

Nothing left on our list for Vitamin A

All two things on our list for Vitamin A have been read. That is rare here.

Still to read means nobody here has got to it, not that it was tried and did nothing or that no research exists. A pairing on no list is not a gap: we never set out to read it.

Read next

This is a library, not advice. No recommendation, no dose, no diagnosis, no ranking. We never ask about your symptoms, and nothing here is tailored to you.